Feed aggregator

A landmark international agreement will create the world’s largest marine park in Antarctica’s Southern Ocean, an environment home to most of the world’s penguins and whales. More than 1.5m sq km of the Ross Sea around Antarctica will be protected under the deal which was brokered in Australia between 24 countries and the European Union

Continue reading...

Common agricultural policy money given to estates in England, including one owned by the Duke of Westminster, Britain’s richest landowner

England’s vast grouse shooting estates receive millions of pounds in public subsidies according to an investigation by Friends of the Earth.

Thirty of the estates received £4m of taxpayer’s money between them in 2014, the year examined by the pressure group, including one owned by the Duke of Westminster, the richest landowner in Britain with land holdings estimated to be worth £9bn

Continue reading...

Australian government 'Grow your own' campaign billboard, 1943. NAA C2829/2

During the devastating floods that hit Queensland in 2011, Brisbane and regional centres came perilously close to running out of fresh food. With the central Rocklea produce market underwater, panic-buying soon set in and supermarket shelves emptied fast.

Such events expose the vulnerability of our urban food systems. Climate change and resource depletion present more slow-burning challenges, but the fact remains that urban food policy is at risk of complacency.

Gardening is certainly good for you, but does it have a role to play in increasing urban food security and resilience? Perhaps history can tell us the answer.

While Australian research has focused on recent urban agriculture initiatives, a real-world experiment in gardening for food security took place in Australia more than 70 years ago, during the Second World War.

Winning the war with home-grown food

Britain, facing serious food shortages, began using the slogan “Dig for Victory” in 1939. In Australia, low-key efforts at encouraging home food production began two years later.

A 1941 survey of Melbourne households revealed that 48% of them already produced food of some kind. In spacious middle-ring suburbs the proportion was as high as 88%, whereas in the dense inner cities it was less than 15%. Food production was most common among middle-class and skilled working-class households, and less so among the poor and marginalised.

By 1943, significant food shortfalls were expected in Australia. The government responded with a range of measures, including a large-scale “Grow Your Own” campaign.

Movies, radio broadcasts, public demonstrations, competitions, posters, newspaper ads and brochures all urged home gardeners to grow their own vegetables. It was hoped this would reduce the strain on the commercial food supply, as well as offering substitutes for rationed food items, providing insurance against commercial food supply failures, and easing the demand on items such as fuel and rubber. Municipal councils and schools also ran vegetable production programmes.

A ‘Grow Your Own’ campaign advertisement from around 1943. PROV, VPRS 10163/P2

While there are no reliable statistics on the campaign’s effectiveness, anecdotal evidence suggests that home food production increased – but not without hitting obstacles along the way.

Wartime disruptions led to shortages of pesticides, seeds, rubber and fertilisers. Livestock and fowl can play an important role in nutrient cycling in sustainable food production, but cows and goats had been excluded from many urban areas in the decades before the war. As a result, competition for local manure was fierce; some gardeners would wait with bucket and shovel for horses on grocery rounds to pass by.

Artificial fertilisers were also expensive and hard to come by. Even the use of blood and bone as an organic fertiliser was restricted, as it was diverted for commercial poultry and pig feed. Alternatives included composting of waste, although this required time and skill, and its nutritional value for plants was limited.

Labour, too, was in short supply. Many able-bodied people had joined the armed forces and others were working long hours in war jobs. This left relatively few urban residents with the time and energy to devote to a vegetable garden. The Women’s Land Army was involved in some urban cultivation, and the YWCA established a “Garden Army” of women who established and tended community gardens on private or public land.

Lessons from the past

What lessons can we learn from this history about the capacity for suburban food production to boost urban food supply in a time of prolonged scarcity?

The most important is that home and community food gardens can contribute meaningfully to resilient urban food systems, but as our urban form is changing we need to explicitly plan for this contribution.

For example, vegetable gardens need space – public or private – that is reasonably open and not crowded by trees. This is one reason why the spacious middle-ring suburbs of Melbourne were more productive than the inner city in 1941.

Sustainable urban food production also requires skill, knowledge and time. Much food gardening today relies heavily on purchased seedlings, manures and pesticides. Resilient food gardens need to have a range of strategies for sourcing essential inputs locally, for example through seed saving networks, composting, local livestock and fowl, and on-site rainwater collection and storage. They also need people with the time and skills to manage these systems.

Vegetable gardening needs skill and knowledge PROV, VPRS 10163/P2

This history also provides inspiration in the form of stories of self-provisioning by everyday people, such as the 56-year-old woman running a habadashery and confectionery store who in 1941 produced all the vegetables and eggs she and her sister required at their Essendon home.

The low-density form of much of Australia’s urban landscape provides considerable potential for sustainable and resilient food production. But our cities still need to invest in developing the skills and systems to sustain this kind of farming.

This is especially critical for low-income areas where resource scarcity will bite hardest. It is also a task that looks ever more challenging as farms are pushed further from the city, while standard homes on shrinking lot sizes and poorly designed infill development eat up urban garden space.

We may not yet be at the stage of needing a nationwide “Grow Your Own” campaign on the scale seen during wartime. But if we want to increase our cities’ resilience and sustainability, we would be foolish to ignore its lessons.

Andrea Gaynor receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Odell, Bedfordshire An ape-like shuffle brings me under coppiced hazel bushes to a string of pale, sunlit fungi, their fresh young caps wrinkled like old skin

A thousand or more years ago there were blue harvests in the fields around Odell. The village was named after the plants that produced the vivid dye beloved of ancient Britons, though, over time, the Saxon’s Woad Hill contracted into its modern form.

Today the fields grow no woad, but harvests of a different sort can be found on the clay cap on top of the hill, where the great wood still stands.

Continue reading...

Protests against the controversial Dakota Access pipeline move into a new phase when police in North Dakota make mass arrests and deploy pepper spray against protesters and the media. Activists say tear gas was also used, claims the county sheriff denies

Continue reading...

An increase in the coal price and Turnbull’s apparent change of view means the Coal Wars are BACK. Re-arm yourself the facts.

The extraordinary resistance to coal seam gas in NSW documented by The Bentley Effect underlines the power of community energy, and delivers a warning to politicians and big business about their energy and business choices. The power is shifting to communities.

SAPN's appeal to recover another $250m in network costs rejected by the Australian Competition Tribunal. But is this a win for consumers?

BluGlass in major fund-raising after completing first stage of review of its ground-breaking technology that could make LEDs cheaper to make.

Tesla to unveil integrated solar roofing line, alongside Powerwall and Powerpack 2.0, the next step in Musk's dream of 100% renewables. Here's what we know about these new products ...

Podcast: ITK interviewed Mick McCormack, CEO of APA, who discusses prospects for energy infrastructure sector and its growing portfolio of renewable energy investments.

Power Ledger is expanding trials of blockchain-based software to open up peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading behind the meter and across the network.

France faces sky-rocketing power prices and supply shortages with 21 of its 58 nuclear reactors offline due to safety concerns. Just as well it can rely on imports of renewable energy from Germany.

Humans aren't the only musical maestros on the planet.

After years of international negotiations, Ross Sea in Antarctica will become the world's largest marine protected area.

MYSTERY OF THE RINGS: Mapping of gravity data from the Moon by NASA's GRAIL mission may finally reveal how a huge bullseye-shaped basin formed on the Moon, say scientists.

DINO BRAIN: A brown bit of rock picked up in the UK by a professional fossil hunter a decade ago is the first piece of fossilised dinosaur brain tissue ever to be found, scientists have confirmed.

The scientific numbers are not yet in from the UK Butterfly Monitoring scheme, but the Big Butterfly Count recorded its worst figures since it began

At first glance, it has been a bafflingly bad summer for butterflies. After a decent spring in the north-west and a dazzling late summer in the south-east, garden buddleias remained bereft. The only butterfly I’ve seen in good number is the red admiral, which thrived during the second-warmest September on record.

The scientific numbers are not yet in from the UK Butterfly Monitoring scheme (a magnificent dataset collected by 2,000 volunteers each summer which celebrates its 40th birthday this year) but the Big Butterfly Count recorded its worst figures since it began – worse than the washout of 2012.

Continue reading...

Company operating near the border with Peru has reportedly had near encounters with indigenous people living in “isolation”

Teams from a Chinese oil and gas company exploring in the remote Bolivian Amazon have reportedly had near encounters with a group of indigenous people living in what the United Nations calls “isolation”, raising major concern for the group’s welfare.

The company doing the exploring, BGP Bolivia, is ultimately a subsidiary of the state-owned China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), one of the biggest oil and gas companies in the world. The near encounters are reported to have taken place in the north-west of the country, close to the border with Peru and just to the east of the world-famous Madidi National Park.

Continue reading...

Marlin are one of the prized fish in Australia's oceans. Marlin image from www.shutterstock.com

Ocean health relies on a strong backbone of protection and management. Marine reserves can be part of the solution, but only if they’re constructed in the right way. Recent recommendations on Australia’s marine reserves would leave more ocean unprotected.

Marine reserves are a mix of multiple-use zones that allow activities such as mining and fishing, and highly-protected zones called marine national parks that are free of extractive activities. These marine national parks are the gold standard for protecting our oceans. Globally, less than 1% of the world’s oceans are fully protected in no-take marine national parks or their equivalents.

Australia is currently deciding how much of its ocean territory it will place in marine national parks and where. To this end, the government recently released its commissioned review of Australia’s Commonwealth Marine Reserve Network.

Such a review is welcome as Australia has yet to provide comprehensive, adequate and representative protection for its oceans. This is despite the general recognition within the Australian community that economic growth depends on a healthy and properly functioning environment.

Marine national parks play a fundamental role in contributing to ocean ecosystem function and provide a means to assess the health of areas outside of these zones that are open to greater use by humans.

This understanding of the interdependence of how we protect and sustainably use our oceans is, unfortunately, largely missing from the review’s recommendations.

The gold standard

In early 2016 the Ocean Science Council of Australia (OSCA) prepared a scientific analysis aimed at helping define what Australia’s marine reserves should deliver.

Based on hundreds of peer-reviewed publications and myriad international consensus statements from researchers on the need for strong ocean protection, the Council concluded that science-based decisions and actions should:

(1) Prevent fishing, mining and other extractive activities on at least 30% of each marine habitat, according to the international standard for ocean protection to deliver protection of both biodiversity and ecosystem services

(2) Improve representation of marine national parks in bioregions (regions of the ocean defined by particular species and climate) and key ecological features (such as the continental shelf and offshore reefs) that were already under-represented in the 2012 marine reserve plans

(3) Build and maintain large, contiguous, highly-protected marine national parks in regions such as the Coral Sea

(4) Quantify the benefits of Australia’s marine reserves so as to make their value to Australia clearer.

What the review says

The government review reflects science and community concerns in some respects, recommending for instance that more bioregions have at least one marine national park. This review also recommends more protection for some important coral reefs and there is an expansion of protection from mining in some areas.

Most importantly, the review recognises the fundamental role of highly-protected marine national park zones in the conservation of species and ecosystems. As a corollary of this, the review also recognises that “partial protection” zones within reserves are primarily used to address narrow sector-based concerns such as fishing, and result in reduced conservation outcomes (as reviewed here and here).

It requires explanation therefore that the review mostly fails to recommend zoning changes consistent with its own findings on the science. In comparison with the 2013 recommended zoning, the review’s recommended zoning would:

(1) Remove a total of 127,000 square kilometres of marine national park from the overall network, an area 1.9 times the size of Tasmania, with a net loss of 76,000 sq km

(2) Reduce by 25% the contiguous Coral Sea marine national park

Changes to Coral Sea marine national park proposed by review. Map generated from shape files provided by the Department of the Environment.

(3) Demote 18 areas from marine national park zones to varying forms of partial protection

(4) Shift the location of some marine national parks from the continental shelf to offshore areas as a way of maintaining cover but further eroding representation and indeed reducing protection on the shelf where it is most needed.

Overall, the review’s recommendations would see only approximately 13% of Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone protected in marine national parks. This falls well below the recommended international standard of at least 30% of habitats being under high protection, or indeed higher levels as recently determined.

Smoke and mirrors

The recommendations in the review are tainted by a feeling of smoke and mirrors. While some of the review’s authors suggest that their recommendations would increase protection, there would indeed be a net loss of highly-protected zones should these recommendations be adopted by the government.

Under the review’s recommendations, Australia would do a great job of protecting the deep water abyss, but achieve little to protect ocean wildlife on the continental shelf where human pressures are highest. This out-of-sight-out-of-mind approach does not address the principles of marine conservation and also departs from recommendations from the research community.

Australian marine national parks are too-often relegated to residual areas of relatively little conservation value simply because these areas are of little value to commercial interests.

The significant erosion of protection in the Coral Sea is further evidence of this failure. Much of the erosion of this important reserve reflects a shift from full protection to partial protection in order to open up more ocean to tuna fishing.

The 25% reduction in large marine national park would increase tuna catch and value by 8-10% across the fishery, worth a mere A$26,376 to individual tuna fishers. This recommendation fails both the science and the economic test.

Where to from here?

The changes recommended by the review in many cases appear to prioritise economic benefits, no matter how trivial, over conservation. This is despite conservation being the core reason behind the marine reserves.

This stands in stark contrast to international moves towards protection of large areas of the ocean as a response to ongoing declines in ocean health.

Key examples of such large-scale protection are US President Barack Obama’s recent expansion of the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument over the North West Hawaiian Islands and New Zealand Prime Minister John Key’s declaration of the Kermadec Marine Sanctuary in New Zealand’s waters.

Australia still has a major opportunity to protect and secure its marine ecosystems and make a significant contribution to global ocean conservation. At the same time we can develop important economic activities such as fishing and mining. Large and well-managed areas are going to become more important, not less, as climate change intensifies.

This will require the federal government to acknowledge and build on the global body of science and create a backbone of representative marine national parks. This will include retention of the Coral Sea’s high level protection and resisting the temptation to shift of marine national parks offshore. At a time of great environmental change, these moves are not just important, but urgent.

This is a contribution from the Ocean Science Council of Australia.

Jessica Meeuwig receives funding from a range of government and philanthropic organisations to support primary research on the state of our oceans and their response to management. She is a member of the Ocean Science Council of Australia.

Craig Johnson receives funding from the Australian Research Council and several other research providers to work on elucidating and predicting marine ecosystem dynamics, how these dynamics are influenced by human activity, and the spatial distribution of marine species and diversity. He works at the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS) at the University of Tasmania, and is a member of the Ocean Sciences Council of Australia (OSCA).

David Booth is affiliated with the Australian coral Reef Society and OSCA. He has received funding from the Australia Research Council for research into coral and fish dynamics on the Great Barrier Reef.

Professor Hoegh-Guldberg undertakes research on coral reef ecosystems and their response to rapid environmental change, which is supported primarily by the Australian Research Council (Canberra), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Washington, D.C.), Catlin Group (London), and Great Barrier Reef Foundation (Brisbane). He not receive salary for writing this article.